Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Department of General Practice, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
BMC Fam Pract. 2021 Jul 15;22(1):152. doi: 10.1186/s12875-021-01504-x.
Diabetes and hypertension care require effective communication between healthcare professionals and patients. Training programs may improve the communication skills of healthcare professionals but no systematic review has examined their effectiveness at improving clinical outcomes and patient experience in the context of diabetes and hypertension care.
We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to summarize the effectiveness of any type of communication skills training for healthcare professionals to improve diabetes and/or hypertension care compared to no training or usual care. We searched Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to August 2020 without language restrictions. Data on the country, type of healthcare setting, type of healthcare professionals, population, intervention, comparison, primary outcomes of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and blood pressure, and secondary outcomes of quality of life, patient experience and understanding, medication adherence and patient-doctor relationship were extracted for each included study. Risk of bias of included studies was assessed by Cochrane risk of bias tool.
7011 abstracts were identified, and 19 studies met the inclusion criteria. These included a total of 21,762 patients and 785 health professionals. 13 trials investigated the effect of communication skills training in diabetes management and 6 trials in hypertension. 10 trials were at a low risk and 9 trials were at a high risk of bias. Training included motivational interviewing, patient centred care communication, cardiovascular disease risk communication, shared decision making, cultural competency training and psychological skill training. The trials found no significant effects on HbA1c (n = 4501, pooled mean difference -0.02 mmol/mol, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.05), systolic blood pressure (n = 2505, pooled mean difference -2.61 mmHg, 95% CI -9.19 to 3.97), or diastolic blood pressure (n = 2440, pooled mean difference -0.06 mmHg, 95% CI -3.65 to 2.45). There was uncertainty in whether training was effective at improving secondary outcomes.
The communication skills training interventions for healthcare professionals identified in this systematic review did not improve HbA1c, BP or other relevant outcomes in patients with diabetes and hypertension. Further research is needed to methodically co-produce and evaluate communication skills training for chronic disease management with healthcare professionals and patients.
糖尿病和高血压的护理需要医护人员与患者之间进行有效的沟通。培训计划可以提高医护人员的沟通技巧,但尚无系统评价检查其在改善糖尿病和/或高血压护理方面对临床结局和患者体验的有效性。
我们对随机对照试验进行了系统评价,以总结任何类型的医护人员沟通技巧培训对改善糖尿病和/或高血压护理的效果,与无培训或常规护理相比。我们检索了 Medline、Embase、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、Cochrane 系统评价数据库(CDSR)、ClinicalTrials.gov 和世界卫生组织国际临床试验注册平台,从成立到 2020 年 8 月,无语言限制。从每个纳入研究中提取有关国家、医疗保健环境类型、医护人员类型、人群、干预措施、比较、糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)和血压的主要结局以及生活质量、患者体验和理解、药物依从性和医患关系的次要结局的数据。使用 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。
共检索到 7011 篇摘要,其中 19 项研究符合纳入标准。这些研究共纳入 21762 名患者和 785 名医护人员。13 项试验研究了沟通技巧培训对糖尿病管理的影响,6 项试验研究了高血压。10 项试验的偏倚风险较低,9 项试验的偏倚风险较高。培训包括动机访谈、以患者为中心的护理沟通、心血管疾病风险沟通、共同决策、文化能力培训和心理技能培训。试验结果显示,HbA1c(n=4501,平均差值-0.02mmol/mol,95%置信区间-0.10 至 0.05)、收缩压(n=2505,平均差值-2.61mmHg,95%置信区间-9.19 至 3.97)或舒张压(n=2440,平均差值-0.06mmHg,95%置信区间-3.65 至 2.45)方面无显著影响。尚不确定培训是否能有效改善次要结局。
本系统评价中确定的医护人员沟通技巧培训干预措施并未改善糖尿病和高血压患者的 HbA1c、BP 或其他相关结局。需要进一步开展系统研究,与医护人员和患者共同制定和评估用于慢性病管理的沟通技巧培训。